Count Me for John Edwards

It's early. But I've decided to go with John Edwards.

Two recent items swayed me:

One, Harry Belafonte's support of Edwards. Belafonte is an immensely impressive guy. He finds Edwards the one major candidate addressing poverty for real. That Belafonte is not supporting the black candidate -- a strong candidate whose presidency by its very fact would have a powerfully salubrious iconic effect on America's profile in the world -- speaks much to me. (And yes, Belafonte is too leftie for some, calling Bush a tyrant etc., to the point where Edwards campaign kept a low profile about the endorsement. Ah, American politics.)

Second, Paul Krugman's recent column "Big Table Fantasies" sealed the deal. Krugman is not an oracle, but he's been one of the most bravely clear-eyed observers of Bush's dirty business from the beginning. He understands we don't need pieties of bipartisanship and common ground sea to warming sea.

What we need is our country back from the looters, the brazen despoilers, and the maniacs. We need someone to lead the fight -- and realize it's a fight, across the board.

Krugman: "Anyone who thinks that the next president can achieve real change without bitter confrontation is living in a fantasy world."

Today's Times op-ed by graybeards Hamilton and Kean, squarely declaring the obvious -- that the withholding of interrogation tapes is an obstruction of the 9-11 Commission -- shows again (again and again and again) the degree to which the powers that be believe they can flout anything and everything they care to.

We will have to fight to reclaim what this country is about -- including its sense of public reality. We need serious committed de-Bushification.

I believe John Edwards has the right spirit to start the job.

With the understanding that saints don't descend, armor twinkling, every four years. The grim truth of democracy seems to be that you have to keep working at it, tending it.

People seem only too happy to take it away from you.

Appreciations to Uber.com where this post first appeared on my blog Brain Flakes.

Also at SmirkingChimp.com

Comments

[pmorlan]

The corporate media is pushing for Obama or Clinton. That ought to tell voters all they need to know!

[outnow]

Go to John Edwards website and read the memorandum of the issues. That scares the daylights out of the insurance companies that Hillary and Obama want to make deals with in exchange for campaign contributions.

Obama and Hillary can easily be defeated by the GOP or co-opted. Either way, it's a win-win for the GOP.

Edwards is the first politicians to come along who will go after media consolidation - three major giants own everything. He will tackle the issue of health insurance coverage for everyone - unless you are a plaintiff's lawyer4 you really don't fight these companies over coverage or benefits as Edwards and plaintiffs lawyers do.

Corporate control of our government would end under Edwards; it would be perpetuated forever under Hillary or Obama.

That's why the media don't want him nominated or elected; he could win and cannot be co-opted, as can Hillary and Obama because they have already taken the campaign contributions from the Pharma, insurance and defense contractors, oil and oil-service companies.

This country needs a populist, progressive who will undo the damage to the Middle Class that resulted from 27 years of class warfare conducted against the lower and middle class beginning with Reagan.

NAFTA brought 20 million unemployed Mexicans to the North of Mexico for the jobs. CAFTA two years later sent the jobs to China. We have lost over a million manufacturing jobs because of NAFTA and gained 20 million Mexicans. They cannot go home because our subsidized corn is being dumped down there so cheaply that they cannot afford to farm.

Obama and Hillary want to continue and expand NAFTA and the MIC. Edwards will stop helping Wall Street and help Main Street. That's what the media doesn't want you to know.

[jmpurser]

I don't know if he believes it or not but he is the only one even TALKING right.

[JoDeeVa]

Thanks, Mr. Yourgrau..
I'm with you. The pundits and much of the populace are much too caught up in idealistic changes and the "first woman" and "first black" president to really grasp the stakes. ALL issues depend on the candidates' understanding and, more importantly, their willingness to accept corporatism, it's influence and $$. The only candidate who seems willing to take on corporate America and it's ironclad grasp on everything from the MIC to healthcare IS John Edwards. I would love to see him get these early states that would lead to being the presidential candidate, but if he is ultimately not that candidate, at least one would hope that his stands on those issues could strengthen the Democratic platform ..before forking over those votes! My hope is that it would be that close in the end!

I have great concerns about mainstream America EVER accepting or electing first woman President Hillary Clinton..or..first black President Barak Obama!
~BUT~
Lest anyone forget what the evangelicals did for President Bush, they just might elect first evangelical fanatic President Mike Huckabee or equally religious fanatic President Mitt Romney! (Bush may have courted them for their vote, but he's definitely not one of them~and~NEVER underestimate the power of the Mormon vote..think that ~$7 billion/yr. in tithing couldn't buy a lot, even an election? The Mormon church has HUGE corporate and real estate $$! You can bet that in the end, republicans would love that more than they hate the religion!)

That thought and scenario alone should scare the lofty "firsts" out of anyone! This election is about SO MUCH MORE than idealistic "change." Without the reality of hard-core change, come the next mid-term elections, it would be back to republican business as usual! We must take back this country from the abyss of religious fanaticism, "manifest destiny" mentalities in foreign affairs and corporate America free market and "Shock Doctrine" economics. The reality is..the change that will make that happen is the change John Edwards will bring! He's the only one challenging corporate-influenced government!

[StrategicThinker]

John Edwards / Mario Cuomo '08

[krissymax]

You are right on! Obama is untested. This spells big trouble for November. Why has the media been so soft - even fluffy about Obama? The Right wing will tear him apart. Chris Matthews cheerleads Obama in ALL his shows, which makes me nervous about November. Edwards and Clinton have been vetted, and due to the negative attacks already launched on Clinton, Edwards is the best choice. However, no matter who wins the Dem nomination, I will support him or her.

[grendl]

There's an elephant in the room, that very few donkeys seem willing to acknowledge.

Who does the GOP fear the most in this election? Or rephrased, who amongst the democratic candidates poses the greatest threat to the Republicans, someone who could potentially tap into their own elephant wading pool and entice members of the pack to potentially break ranks?

Well, Carter Clinton, Johnson, white males from the South have a great track record in defeatiung the GOP, so who amongst the candidates fits that bill.

And who have the GOP failed to target and ridicule in their attacks across the aisle?

They're scared to death of John Edwards. Which doesn't necessarily mean he's the most qualified for the job, or that he isn't, it's merely a superficial point. But we are a superficial society, who aren't quit as enlightened as some would have us believe. Bigotry, racism, sexism is still rampant in America, but the votes of racists and sexists count just as much as those of the enlightened.

John Edwards scares the living fuck out of the GOP.

[Nutcase]

Welcome to the room without a table.